Re: EasyGit Integration

[Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>]

On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Theodore Tso wrote:
> 
> My personal opinion is this kind of overloading is actually more
> confusing than simply adding a new name, such as "git revert-file".

I'd agree, except I think it actually worked pretty well in "git 
checkout". 

The alternative was to add yet another command for that, or to teach 
people about the internal commands we did have. Adding the capability for 
checkout to check out individual files - in addition to commits and 
branches - I think worked pretty well.

And "git checkout" in many ways is an even more complicated case, much 
more so than the suggested "git revert".

Now, I also happen to think that "git checkout [cmit] -- pathspec" is a 
much more _logical_ name for what the SVN people apparently call "revert", 
but hey, whatever. If SVN people feel happier about writing "git revert 
<pathspec>", then why not?

But I certainly won't argue very sternuously for adding that whole new 
"git revert [cmit] [--] <pathspec>" syntax. I can certainly live without 
it.  I don't think it would be a disaster, though.

		Linus